{"id":35957,"date":"2024-02-27T06:00:57","date_gmt":"2024-02-27T14:00:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/?p=35957"},"modified":"2024-02-19T16:15:36","modified_gmt":"2024-02-20T00:15:36","slug":"the-ants-are-killing-me","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/the-ants-are-killing-me\/","title":{"rendered":"The ANTs are killing me"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Black<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The Bat and Ball illustration[1]<\/sup><\/a> took me longer to get right than it should have, but that is probably the point. My impulsive System 1 took control, and intuition led me to the wrong answer. How could the answer not be 10 cents? So much for \u201cDon\u2019t think Blink![2]<\/sup><\/a>\u201d<\/p>\n

When System 1 encounters a problem, it can’t immediately grasp, it enlists System 2 to help solve it, which seems reasonable. However, if System 1 is misled into believing a problem is simpler than it is, this may explain my many mistakes in decision-making. Let me clarify, I’ve undoubtedly made some sound decisions as well, but reflecting on “thinking fast and slow” prompts me to reconsider some of my quick, instinctive decision-making processes.<\/p>\n

For years, when confronted with a dilemma, a colleague’s prompt of “BLINK” has been upheld as a reliable method for making decisions; yet, what if some of those decisions were misguided? It is possible that the BLINK technique merely served as a sophisticated guise for relying on the “law of least effort”[3]<\/sup><\/a>. As Kahneman points out, “Even in the absence of time pressure, maintaining a coherent train of thought requires discipline”[4]<\/sup><\/a>. I wonder how frequently I’ve justified avoiding System 2, attributing it to being too busy, under pressure, or lazy (or, in a kinder way, \u201ccognitive ease[5]<\/sup><\/a>\u201d).<\/p>\n

I\u2019ve often reflected on key team meetings, and while previously having defined them as \u201cone percenters\u201d Kahneman defines it as Primers. The \u201cone percenters\u201d consist of the \u2018little\u2019 things that we (ministry\/leadership team) either consistently get wrong or repeatedly fail on, in intermittent periods. I arrive at church on any given Sunday with a full tank, 100%. I am full of faith, hope and expectation that the day will succeed, with increasing numbers, many salvations, miracles and a \u2018feel good factor!\u2019. The \u201cone percenters\u201d reduce the \u2018fullness\u2019 of my tank, leading to irritation and frustration on my part. \u201cOne percenters\u201d may include light bulbs not working, foyer screens not functioning, seating not spaced, smoke machines running too long, house and stage lighting incorrect, overflowing bins, mismanagement of parking flow causing delays, volume and mix levels with the sound system, etc. Before long, I can be operating at 75%, with 25 one percenter\u2019s eating away at me. In isolation, these can be petty grievances, and, compared with the plight of Christians in the persecuted world, they are. When these \u201cone percenters\u201d repeat themselves, it causes me to conclude that \u201cif we cannot get these little things right, how will we ever achieve more?\u201d The primers of frustration can cause me to make incorrect decisions. How do I make better decisions when the primers have not set me up for success and when \u201cexaggerated emotional coherence\u201d as a negative effect of the \u201chalo effect\u201d[6]<\/sup><\/a> has occurred?<\/p>\n

I suspect that \u201cconfirmation bias\u201d[7]<\/sup><\/a> is at work on any given Sunday. Perhaps I go looking for the \u201cone percenters\u201d and I need to think Fast & Slow. Beyond the recognition of Systems 1 & 2, one key lesson from the book that stands out for enhancing decision-making in the context of negative, emotional primers, is the distinction between the experiencing self and the remembering self[8]<\/sup><\/a>. Understanding this concept can effectively neutralise the impact of faulty decision-making and enable a leader to overcome ANTs.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Research indicates that humans have approximately 60,000 thoughts each day[9]<\/sup><\/a> and that up to 70%, are negative, a phenomenon known as \u2018negativity dominance\u2019.[10]<\/sup><\/a> Dealing with this \u2018mental chatter\u2019 is an activity we employ 24\/7, and yet some thoughts affect our emotions, creating a downward spiral. The \u201cone-percenters\u201d can impact my emotions. Automatic Negative Thoughts or ANTs are incredibly harmful, causing \u201cchronic stress\u201d which\u201d shrinks the brain\u201d[11]<\/sup><\/a> and changes the chemical makeup in the brain, creating a negative effect in life. These effects include:<\/p>\n